The charge that the Bills were "pass happy" is a bit overstated. In 2012 the Bills ranked 13th in rushing attempts at 27.6/game, 6th in rushing yards. They ranked 23rd in passing attempts, with 31.9/game, and 25th in passing yards. This is not pass happy by any stretch, and more balanced than many teams. As another poster pointed out, it is perhaps a valid criticism that Gailey passed in some situations he should have run. I think the bigger problem these stats inidcate is that the Bils passing game was not nearly effective enough, not that they passed too much.

The charge that the Bills were "pass happy" is a bit overstated. In 2012 the Bills ranked 13th in rushing attempts at 27.6/game, 6th in rushing yards. They ranked 23rd in passing attempts, with 31.9/game, and 25th in passing yards. This is not pass happy by any stretch, and more balanced than many teams. As another poster pointed out, it is perhaps a valid criticism that Gailey passed in some situations he should have run. I think the bigger problem these stats inidcate is that the Bils passing game was not nearly effective enough, not that they passed too much.

Exactly.

I think there's some truth to this. But if you want to see ineffective passing, go back to the Jauron era. Gailey's passing game was ten times more effective than Jauron's--his offense in general was.

The downfall of Gailey's tenure at Buffalo was not the way he handled the offense. It was the complete inability of the defense to function effectively with any consistency. A middle-of-the-pack defense would have had the Bills in the playoffs two of his three years here.

I think there's some truth to this. But if you want to see ineffective passing, go back to the Jauron era. Gailey's passing game was ten times more effective than Jauron's--his offense in general was.

The downfall of Gailey's tenure at Buffalo was not the way he handled the offense. It was the complete inability of the defense to function effectively with any consistency. A middle-of-the-pack defense would have had the Bills in the playoffs two of his three years here.

I absolutely agree with this - the offense was much better than the defense, and with even adequate defensive performance, they would have won more games. Still on the offensive side, there were simply too many misfires in critical siutations, not to mention fumbles and interceptions by the QB, to make the offensive design of Gailey work as efficiently as it should have. This also cost them games. What many would argue is that understanding that, Gailey should have adjusted his design to run more often, but I do not think that would have worked. When they tried to run the ball down people's throats they were rarely effective. You need balance, and more often than not it is effective passing, or at least the threat of it, that opens up the ability to run. Most teams are more pass than run oriented in today's game.

call it what you want Promo. It's starting to sound like your a Chan backer. Just sayin.

FWIW I'm a Chan Backer.. I thought he was a great leader and put together a great offense. If you actually watched the offensive schemes plays were there to be made just not executed. I think injuries to the WR core hurt Fitz and faith in Wanny led to his demise.

FWIW.. Little Donte would have helped this defense much more than the G Wilson this season.

If this team's offense takes a huge nose dive next year, this board will be wishing Chan Gailey's offense was still in place. Like it or not, this team was far more productive on the offensive side of the ball with him as coach. We'll never know what that offense could have been capable of when playing with a lead, or in a dominating game, since there weren't any in his regime.(no I do not count the KC games, they are the exception)